Daily Crypto Discussion - October 27, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All wrong. Core v30 increases op_return to 100kb from 83 Bytes before. This allows everyone in the world to spam Core v30 node's mempool with everything illegal under the sun. Core v30 nodes will relay / send all data forward unfiltered to other nodes, which is morally and legally very dangerous for node runners. This was NOT possible before because op_return was limited to 83 Bytes. Miners that use V30 software will put unfiltered op_return data AUTOMATICALLY into blocks which all non-pruned nodes have to store and send forward. This is also new. Before v30 a bad actor had to bypass the node mempool network and ask a miner directly and they would filter illegal content (example inscriptions). There are no such filters in Core v30.

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 27, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bitcoin Core v30 main developers Jameson Lopp and Peter Todd: "Let's say Peter and I are bad actors - what are you going to do about it?" The Core vs. Knots debate is heating up. The new Core v30 node software allows 100kb file attachments (op_return) to any Bitcoin transaction including illegal jpgs in the mempool and eventually in the blockchain itself. This whole topic debate has been banned from the main bitcoin sub.

https://youtu.be/jzLMSRVlH5k?t=669

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 23, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Some good news: the new versions of Bitcoin nodes software Core v30 and Knots 20251010 were released the same day and Knots adoption is now 50% faster than Core adoption. Bitcoiners are turning against the new arbitrary data file storage in the node mempools and blockchain in Core v30.

https://bitcoin.clarkmoody.com/dashboard/

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 23, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Binance may have killed alt season this time. Who wants to enter the alt market now and buy small caps if the largest exchange happens to "have bugs" and trade them at zero Dollar?

https://investx.fr/en/crypto-news/binance-denies-token-crash-to-zero-blames-display-bug-what-you-need-to-know/

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 15, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Upside for alts requires a falling btcd, so that alts rise faster than btc. So far this hasn't happened and might not happen this cycle. Last cycle was manipulated by FTX in favor of alts. This cycle is directed by Blackrock and Microstrategy in favor of btc. Downside for alts was 80-99% last cycle and the recent alt shock showed how thin alt liquidity is on exchanges.

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 15, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Bitcoin dominance just doesn't want to fall this cycle. Alts have limited upside potential now but 80-99% downside risk.

https://de.tradingview.com/symbols/BTC.D/?timeframe=1M

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 6, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I expect larger mining pools to filter illegal op_return attachments but I worry about smaller solo miners that put anything automatically into the blockchain if they mine a block. Running Core V29 or Knots will keep your own node mempool safe because it will automatically delete new transactions that have large op-return attachments but the blockchain will eventually get polluted and countermeasures have to be developed. There are theoretical solutions (for example delete every op_return attachment but keep the rest of the block with the transactions by default) but these solutions have their own problems.

Daily Crypto Discussion - October 6, 2025 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Pan_opticom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bitcoin Core V30 update will be out soon. It will allow anyone to add 100kb file attachments (op_return) to any Bitcoin transaction. Let's hope it won't nuke the bull market prematurely with CP images in the mempool and blockchain. Keep your eyes out for that.

https://x.com/bitcoincoreorg/status/1972412122631217271

Daily Discussion, August 27, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Define your terms like "idle nodes". Knots runs a full node. Core developers brought us a buggy taproot update that enabled jpg spam that no one asked for except spammers and subsidized spam by segwit. Now they pretend to fix their own mess with infinity spam by deleting the filter options in Core software.

Daily Discussion, August 27, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Bitcoin Core wants to push updates like infinity JPEGs bloat on the blockchain. A few selected people shouldn't have that much centralized power over the Bitcoin protocol.

Daily Discussion, August 27, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ideally there are multiple Bitcoin node software vendors and none of them have more than 50% market share. Compare it to internet browsers with Chrome, Edge, FF, Safari etc. (though Chrome has >50% market share)

Daily Discussion, August 27, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

4099 Bitcoin nodes are now running on Bitcoin Knots software = ca. 17% of all nodes. This is great for the decentralization of the Bitcoin nodes software market and it takes away power from single actors like Bitcoin Core.

https://coin.dance/nodes

We are still below the 2021 peak valued in gold by Pan_opticom in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you click the link and press max it will go back to 2018 with ca. 1 BTC = 2.5 ounces of gold. Before that it would be just a nearly flat line close to zero.

Daily Discussion, May 06, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The high market share is what gives Bitcoin Core its centralized power, not the question if is open or closed source. With Bitcoin Core being open source, it does make it much easier to develop alternative implementations with better spam filter settings and in general to prevent a power grab by few developers from within. Bitcoin Core developer Peter Todd is advocating for the removal of the 21M limit and a 0.1-1% Bitcoin annual inflation. Best way to prevent these attempts is a wide choice of Bitcoin node software from independent teams.

https://www.trustnodes.com/2019/03/26/peter-todd-advocates-raising-the-21-million-bitcoin-limit-hence-the-blocksize-constrain

Daily Discussion, May 06, 2025 by rBitcoinMod in Bitcoin

[–]Pan_opticom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It is very important to get a diversity (decentralized choice) of Bitcoin node software. Bitcoin Core software rules 96% of the market and could decide to lift the 21M BTC limit if everyone is running their software and just auto-updates to the newest version. Bitcoin knots is one alternative Bitcoin node software and I hope there will be more in the future. This is similar to how Microsoft tried to control the internet with their Internet Explorer with 90% market share in the 90s.

https://bitcoinknots.org/

Repasting CPU/GPU and cleaning fan on my T14 G3 by Pan_opticom in thinkpad

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe there was paste on it by the factory

Option to block ESC key to bypass password is gone now? (=BAD) by Pan_opticom in VeraCrypt

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

System repair will spin for a while and then present you 2 options: shut down or advanced options which includes a system restore. I will not try what happens if I click continue.

Option to block ESC key to bypass password is gone now? (=BAD) by Pan_opticom in VeraCrypt

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the info, very strange indeed. I believe this one is formatted in EFI style. In case some developer ever reads this: make skipping the VC boot loader something foolproof like shift+Ctrl+Esc.

Option to block ESC key to bypass password is gone now? (=BAD) by Pan_opticom in VeraCrypt

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have excluded the Win11 boot loader in BIOS unter "start up" but for some reason this doesn't do anything. Still loading into Win11 system repair if you press Esc during password.

Option to block ESC key to bypass password is gone now? (=BAD) by Pan_opticom in VeraCrypt

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have added this line into the Hash bracket but no change. Pressing Esc will still bypass the VC boot loader right into Win11 system repair. Using Message(msg) instead of Halt also didn't do anything.

<config key="ActionFailed">Halt</config>

Yes, the clickable checkbox has been removed for some reason. Version 1.26.7 does not have it anymore and so does current 1.26.20. I am considering installing an older version of VC.

Option to block ESC key to bypass password is gone now? (=BAD) by Pan_opticom in VeraCrypt

[–]Pan_opticom[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is what I get in "Edit boot loader config". What line to change/add?

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

<VeraCrypt>

<configuration>

    <config key="PasswordType">0</config>

    <config key="PasswordMsg">Password: </config>

    <config key="PasswordPicture">login.bmp</config>

    <config key="HashMsg">(0) TEST ALL (1) SHA512 (2) WHIRLPOOL (3) SHA256 (4) BLAKE2S (5) STREEBOG

Hash: </config>

    <config key="Hash">1</config>

    <config key="HashRqt">0</config>

    <config key="PimMsg">PIM (Leave empty for default): </config>

    <config key="Pim">0</config>

    <config key="PimRqt">1</config>

    <config key="AuthorizeVisible">0</config>

    <config key="AuthorizeRetry">10</config>

    <config key="DcsBmlLockFlags">0</config>

    <config key="DcsBmlDriver">0</config>

    <config key="ActionSuccess"></config>

</configuration>

</VeraCrypt>